On Jul 1, 6:51*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
See

http://us.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/06/30/...car/index.html

The idea isn't new. It has been tried before ending up a novelty. The
result this time around in my opinion will garner the same result. The
world economical issues aside and even discounting the narrow
potential sales demographic for the product, there remains a single
issue that I haven't seen mentioned at all about this product. There
is a HUGE, and I mean a HUGE problem that goes along with the purchase
of a product like this one.

Assuming one buys this thing intending to use it as advertised; the
800 pound gorilla in the room will be the fact that no matter how you
cut down the intended use, it's still an aircraft, and the fact that
it's not only an aircraft, but will obviously be an object of instant
public curiosity means that ANYWHERE this thing gets "parked" outside
the security of an airport, the purchaser will either have to supply
on site security for the vehicle or take a HUGE chance that during the
owner's absence, something or someone hasn't compromised the vehicle
by some human interaction (touching, changing something, damaging
something on the vehicle) that could become a potential safety issue
the next time the vehicle is FLOWN.
I see this single factor as a down side so negative it will absolutely
have to become a strong consideration for any potential purchaser of
this product.
The bottom line is that used as advertized, unless security goes with
the vehicle everywhere it sits, the purchaser had better become the
world's most proficient expert in the subject of preflight inspection.
I believe once what I've written above is seriously considered by
potential buyers, this vehicle (and I like the concept and actually
like the design.....it's neat as hell really)
will see a very limited market and eventually fade from view into a
museum.
Dudley Henriques